People v. Villareal

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Villareal

    2022 IL 127318 (Ill. 2023)   Cited 6 times
    In Villareal, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the Act's second definition of a gang member-a person who acts as agent or accessory to a course or pattern of gang-related criminal activity or is legally accountable for or voluntarily associates with the same-as "undoubtedly" encompassing active participation in gang-related criminal activity.

    The appellate court rejected petitioner's eighth amendment challenge and declined to address the due process claim, as it was raised for the first time in petitioner's supplemental brief. 2021 IL App (1st) 181817, ¶¶ 17-21, 28. One dissenting justice found the statute violated substantive due process.

  2. People v. Kirkpatrick

    2024 Ill. App. 5th 200055 (Ill. App. Ct. 2024)

    Defendant raised this issue in a supplemental brief filed after the original round of briefing. Where our rules do not allow an appellant to assert new issues in a reply brief, the appellant should also not be allowed "to file a supplemental brief which seeks to accomplish the same purpose, i.e., to raise an issue not previously considered in his original brief." People v. Pertz, 242 Ill.App.3d 864, 914 (1993); see also People v. Harris, 129 Ill.2d 123, 171 (1989); People v. Villareal, 2021 IL App (1st) 181817, ¶¶ 25-26; People v. Serritella, 2022 IL App (1st) 200072, ¶¶ 111.

  3. People v. Wells

    2023 Ill. App. 3d 210292 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023)   Cited 10 times

    A defendant may attack a statute's constitutionality on appeal even if he did not raise the issue in the trial court in his postconviction petition. People v. Villareal, 2021 IL App (1st) 181817, ¶ 11 (citing People v. Thompson, 2015 IL 118151, ¶ 32, and Davis, 2014 IL 115595, ¶ 26). Thus, even though defendant did not raise the constitutionality of section 5-4.5-115 of the Unified Code in his postconviction petition, we will consider defendant's challenge on appeal.

  4. People v. Garcia

    2021 Ill. App. 172212 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)   Cited 1 times

    It then maintains that all remaining claims have been abandoned on appeal and may not be "resurrected" in defendant's reply brief, at oral argument, or in a petition for rehearing. In support of its claim, the State relied on People v. Villareal, 2021 IL App (1st) 181817, ¶ 26.